I checked the link. Can I use this plug as a beta plug?
------------------
Pro-New Zealand Lobbyist in an F-14 from (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums")EV-Nova.net(/url)
-
Quote
Originally posted by yomcat:
**I also like the Mustang and the Spit, but German Planes are the best overall. I'm pretty sure that they did break the sound barrier. He was diving in a Me 262 to rescue his friend.I'm also pretty sure that that other game is Red Alert, not Code Red.
Does anybody want to help?
**
It's possible (F-86 pilots occasionally did this in powered dives - they called it "cracking the whip," and were able to do it before Yeager, but probably didn't realize what they were doing) that the pilot momentarily broke the sound barrier, but I think that he meant sustained supersonic flight.
Matrix
------------------
"Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool." -
Quote
Originally posted by yomcat:
**I checked the link. Can I use this plug as a beta plug?**
Replied to your message. Thanks for your interest.
Jeffrey - Arios SoftWare
------------------
(url="http://"http://www.ariossoftware.com/upcoming")EVONE 1.0.0 - the plugin editor for EV/EVO/EVN(/url) -
Quote
Originally posted by AriosSw:
**Replied to your message. Thanks for your interest.Jeffrey - Arios SoftWare
**
What message?
My email is (url="http://"mailto:yomcat@yahoo.co.nz")mailto:yomcat@yahoo.co.nz(/url)yomcat@yahoo.co.nz -
Quote
Originally posted by what_is_the_matrix:
**It's possible (F-86 pilots occasionally did this in powered dives - they called it "cracking the whip," and were able to do it before Yeager, but probably didn't realize what they were doing) that the pilot momentarily broke the sound barrier, but I think that he meant sustained supersonic flight.Matrix
**
Yeah, I meant sustained flight over Mach 1. Once any plane not designed for supersonic flight went over a certain speed, it kinda ran into a minor problem: it was traveling faster than the shells coming out of its guns. In short, they would shoot themselves down if they opened fire on an enemy aircraft. And Sabre pilots knew perfectly well what they were doing. The Air Force didn't like it too much, because they had a big PR problem with the folks whose windows just got shattered by the sonic booms. But, lemme tell ya, those Sabre pilots loved every minute of it.
------------------
Youre only given a little spark of madness. You mustnt lose it.
-- Robin Williams -
Quote
Originally posted by spacecowboy:
**Yeah, I meant sustained flight over Mach 1. Once any plane not designed for supersonic flight went over a certain speed, it kinda ran into a minor problem: it was traveling faster than the shells coming out of its guns. In short, they would shoot themselves down if they opened fire on an enemy aircraft. And Sabre pilots knew perfectly well what they were doing. The Air Force didn't like it too much, because they had a big PR problem with the folks whose windows just got shattered by the sonic booms. But, lemme tell ya, those Sabre pilots loved every minute of it.**
Sorry I'm taking this even further off topic, but I thought that bullets generally travel faster than the speed of sound. Also, wouldn't a bullet coming from a gun traveling faster than the speed of sound travel even faster? Of course, there's terminal velocity to worry about, but whatever. Actually, the problem with traveling the speed of sound is that certain wing forms (like wings from the non-supersonic era) cause waves of extremely high pressure (essentially shockwaves) to form as the plane approaches the supersonic threshold, causing the control surfaces to flutter. The pilot can't maintain control (and also has an extremely hard time regaining control since his control surfaces don't particularly want to move) and either digs himself a hole in the ground, or the flutter shakes the plane apart. The Sabre came from a time when supersonic flight was around the corner, so its wings were just adequate for maintaining control when approaching the supersonic threshold.
Matrix
------------------
"Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool." -
The German Aircraft didn't actually break the spped of the sound. the plane that got closest was the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, and it hit the sound barrier and 'bounced' off. I'm not sure, but one of the Messerschmitt projects (1011 or 1111 or 1112) may have broken the sound barrier. I'll have to do more research.
------------------
Pro-New Zealand Lobbyist in an F-14 from (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums")EV-Nova.net(/url) -
Quote
Originally posted by what_is_the_matrix:
**Sorry I'm taking this even further off topic, but I thought that bullets generally travel faster than the speed of sound. Also, wouldn't a bullet coming from a gun traveling faster than the speed of sound travel even faster? Of course, there's terminal velocity to worry about, but whatever. Actually, the problem with traveling the speed of sound is that certain wing forms (like wings from the non-supersonic era) cause waves of extremely high pressure (essentially shockwaves) to form as the plane approaches the supersonic threshold, causing the control surfaces to flutter. The pilot can't maintain control (and also has an extremely hard time regaining control since his control surfaces don't particularly want to move) and either digs himself a hole in the ground, or the flutter shakes the plane apart. The Sabre came from a time when supersonic flight was around the corner, so its wings were just adequate for maintaining control when approaching the supersonic threshold.Matrix
**
Not sure about the bullets thing, but I remember that certain aircraft can actually outrun the shells they're firing. And bullets wouldn't necessarily go faster if the airplane was going faster. Remember, even though a bullet is fairly streamlined, it still has a drag factor. And at Mach 1, the drag factor of a round of .50-cal API ammunition is probably enough to force it to move slower than the aircraft that fired it. There's actually a pretty good chance it wouldn't even get out of the barrel, with the kind of air pressure in there.
And true with the flutter. The shockwave would develop right over the control surfaces, causing what was called 'wing rock' (pretty obvious, huh?). I've done this before in a physics-realistic flight sim. If you got up to a pretty high altitude and sent your bird straight for the ground, the wing rock would get so intense that it would actually rip the aircraft apart. And I wouldn't recommend bailing out at 700 mph Yes, the Sabre's swept-back wings certainly helped it at high speeds. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons Sabre pilots loved to crack the whip: after you went over Mach 1, your controls returned, allowing you to pull out of the dive -- and live to see another day.
And yes, I'm a military aviation nut. Some people think that I'm just a nut, no prefix required.
Have a good weekend.
------------------
Youre only given a little spark of madness. You mustnt lose it.
-- Robin Williams -
Quote
Originally posted by yomcat:
**The German Aircraft didn't actually break the spped of the sound. the plane that got closest was the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, and it hit the sound barrier and 'bounced' off. I'm not sure, but one of the Messerschmitt projects (1011 or 1111 or 1112) may have broken the sound barrier. I'll have to do more research.**
I remember that the Brits had a program to try to break the speed of sound in Spitfires, but there were a bunch of fatalities (I saw a filmstrip of a Spitfire pilot literally digging his own grave), and the program was cancelled. The wing flutter occurs when a plane with thick wings (like any WWII prop-driven aircraft) approaches the sound barrier. The optimum wing for a supersonic jet is a wing that is longer (from leading edge to trailing edge), and narrower. The solution: swept back wings. This allows the wing to remain thick, but the sweep makes the distance from leading edge to trailing edge longer, making the wing narrower in proportion to the length. That's the reason behind swept back/forward wings. While back and forward sweep do similar things to allow the plane to go faster, a plane with forward sweep is a lot more unstable than a plane with comperable sweep back. Making the plane unstable promotes faster entry into maneuvers, but also faster entry into loss of control, making fly-by-wire systems almost a necessity. I used to be more of an aviation nut than I am now, but this is stuff that I remember.
Matrix
------------------
"Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool." -
You two seem to know alot. do any of you want to help with the plug?
------------------
Pro-New Zealand Lobbyist in an F-14 from (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums")EV-Nova.net(/url) -
Quote
Originally posted by yomcat:
**You two seem to know alot. do any of you want to help with the plug?**
Well, I'm currently involved with another plug right now, but if you need my help, then contact me (privately), and I'll see what I can do.
Matrix
------------------
"Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool." -
Quote
Originally posted by what_is_the_matrix:
**Well, I'm currently involved with another plug right now, but if you need my help, then contact me (privately), and I'll see what I can do.Matrix
**
I'm emailling you, but do these forums have Private Messages so I can make it easier?
------------------
Pro-New Zealand Lobbyist in an F-14 from (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums")EV-Nova.net(/url) -
Nope. Sorry yom.
------------------
Eat blazing electric death!
(url="http://"http://www.geocities.com/infernomsh")Inferno Studios)(/url)
(being remade better than ever!) -
Quote
Originally posted by SpacePirate:
**Nope. Sorry yom.**
That sucks. The phpBB boards are better. I don't like these boards. You can't even send PMs. Go EV-nova.net!!!!
------------------
Pro-New Zealand Lobbyist in an F-14 from (url="http://"http://www.ev-nova.net/forums")EV-Nova.net(/url)